When HAK (Armenian National Congress) spokesman Levon Zurabyan was interviewed on Armenian Public TV for the first time and demanded the resignation of the president, it finally became apparent that the political situation in Armenia had really changed.

Naturally, this step by Armenian Public TV wasn’t an expression of its tolerance. It merely meant that the government no longer views the ANC as a serious and viable competitor; especially when compared to the ANC’s position three years ago.

The government, by allowing the ANC to appear on Public TV, even won some PR points.

The ANC is in a free-fall and every action it takes leads it to tactical defeat. This is proven by the following two realities.

It could have refused to appear on Public TV, but given the block placed on the TV, it probably figured it was best to take advantage of the offer. But by accepting the offer, the ANC lost the image of being a political forces persecuted by the regime. This image was a huge playing card for the ANC.

Secondly, while on the one hand declaring the total resignation of the president, on the other, the ANC states that this must be done either through the current National Assembly, a rubber stamp body for the president, or that it must be achieved through the next parliamentary election; the latter being unacceptable to the ANC up till now.

As a result, the ANC has agreed to follow a process that it had always labelled as a mere venue for the regime to “reproduce” itself.

These recent tactical defeats have moved the ANC away from its former position of monopolizing the opposition to the opposition sidelines. As a result of the ANC-regime battle, we are faced with a totally new realignment of the political forces in Armenia.

Opposition vacuum

There’s a vacuum in the opposition ranks. The ANC has given up on taking pro-active measures but there is no one else willing or able to fill the void.

Various opposition forces can either decide to go it alone, trying to take over the mantle of “radical” opposition independently of the others, or else work towards some type of election coalition.

Today, none of the opposition forces are capable of going it alone, especially because there is no longer a public demand for a radical opposition.

The ANC might try to but only because it has no other choice. If it were to enter into some new political entity, the ANC faces the risk of being dissolved in the process.

The ARF and Heritage parties have the potential to coalesce. The only principled difference is their ideological perspective – the first is socialist and the latter, liberal-conservative. However when it comes to national matters they two have much in common.

They also have a track record of collaboration in parliament; especially during the past two years.

The main problem facing the two parties is their individual ambitions and their internal battle for position, which decreases the level of mutual trust between them.

Recently Anoush Sedrakyan, VP of the Free Democrats, who pulled out of the HHZh (Pan-National Armenian Movement), mentioned the possibility of collaborating with Heritage.

The formation of such a structure is realistic given the ideological commonality that exists between the two rightwing forces.

However, given that it’s a new organization that really hasn’t proved itself on the political arena, the Free Democrats might turn out to be more of a headache than a help to Heritage.

Then too, there’s the public mistrust of these former HHZh members.

The regime’s reproduction resource

There are no grey areas when it comes to those in power. Neither is there a vacuum.

Instead, what we have is a battle for position internal to the ruling coalition. The opposition is waiting to see how that battle turns out; so is the public at large.

If this system remains in place, then you can forget about any real change in any sector in Armenia.

If the system remains then the country will enter a phase of stagnation either leading to the downfall of the regime or the establishment of authoritarian rule tending towards totalitarianism.

Such a fate can only be avoided if there is real substantive change within the regime, a breath of fresh air. But by judging the tendencies to reproduce that have given rise to the internal regime intrigues we see today, it’s a safe bet to say that such an understanding within the ruling circles has yet to gel.

Two essential directions are taking shape based on the forces and interests at stake.

The ruling Republican Party of Armenia (RPA) is turning into a defender of party and nomenclature interests, not only equating the two but by making it the Party’s main moving force.

The Prosperous Armenia Party (PAP) has assumed the role of serving the interests of the executive and particularly the oligarchy.

At least externally, these two directions start to come into opposition.

This is the reason why the president has come out for removing business from the political arena. In this internal confrontation, the advantage still rests with the president and the nomenclature.

By undermining the oligarchy, the president can not only monitor the political and economic systems but also his main rival, the Prosperous Armenia Party.

The Rule of Law Party isn’t really a player at all and has nothing much to offer its larger coalition partners.

In the coming years, the Rule of Law will remain under the shadow of the Republican Party; a move that saved Rule of Law from total marginalization in the first place.

Giving all this, we not only face partisan RPA-PAP competition but also a much bigger clash of interests on the horizon.

However, given that the nomenclature and oligarchy essentially share the same value system, this confrontation cannot lead to serious qualitative and substantive changes.